BUILDING SERVICES BOARD and CRAMPHORN [2016] WASAT 57

Jurisdiction:	STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL	Citation No:	[2016] WASAT 57
Act:	BUILDING SERVICES (REGISTRATION) ACT 2011
Case No:	VR:22/2016	Heard:	DETERMINED ON THE DOCUMENTS
Coram:	JUSTICE J C CURTHOYS (PRESIDENT)	Delivered:	20/05/16
No of pages:	24	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Disciplinary matters found to exist in conduct of practitioner under the Building Services (Complaints Resolution and Administration) Act 2011 (WA) and the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 (WA) Global fine of $20,000 imposed Practitioner to pay Building Services Board's costs
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	BUILDING SERVICES BOARD GARY ALAN CRAMPHORN
Catchwords:	Conviction of offence against the Building Services (Complaints Resolution and Administration) Act 2011 Breach of the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 Breach of the Home Building Contracts Act 1991 - Disciplinary orders sought by Building Services Board Penalty
Legislation:	Building Services (Complaints Resolution and Administration) Act 2011 (WA), s 41(2), s 51(3)(a), s 51(3)(b), Pt 4, Div 4 Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 (WA), s 18(1)(b), s 51(1)(f), s 52(1), s 53, s 53(1)(a)(ii), s 56(2)(a), s 58, s 58(1) Building Services (Registration) Regulations 2011 (WA), reg 18 Home Building Contracts Act 1991 (WA), s 10(1)(a)(i) State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 87(1), s 87(2)
Case References:	Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 Builders' Registration Board of Western Australia and Elliott [2009] WASAT 44 Legal Profession Complaints Committee and Wells [2014] WASAT 112 Legal Profession Complaints Committee and Wells [2014] WASAT 112 (S) Medical Board of Western Australia and Roberman [2005] WASAT 81 (S) NOM v Director of Public Prosecutions (2012) 38 VR 618 Paridis v Settlement Agents Supervisory Board [2007] WASCA 97 Quinn v Law Institute of Victoria [2007] VSCA 122 Re Lamperd [1983] 46 ALR 371 Rejfek v McElroy (1965) 112 CLR 517 Western Australian Planning Commission v Questdale Holdings Pty Ltd [2016] WASCA 32
Orders	1. The Tribunal finds that a disciplinary matter exists in that: ,(a) after registration Mr Cramphorn was convicted of an offence against the Building Services (Complaints Resolution and Administration Act) 2011 (WA); s 53(1)(a)(ii) of the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 (WA);,(b) Mr Cramphorn does not satisfy the financial requirements pursuant to s 18(1)(b) of the Building Services (Registration Act) 2011 (WA) Act; s 53(1)(b) of the Building Services (Registration Act) 2011 (WA);,(c) Mr Cramphorn failed to comply with an order of the Building Commissioner under the Building Services (Complaints Resolution and Administration Act) 2011 (WA); s 53(1)(l) of the Building Services (Registration Act) 2011 (WA); and,(d) Mr Cramphorn if a building service contractor, failed to ensure that a building service carried out by him had been properly managed and supervised; s 53(1)(f) of the Building Services (Registration Act) 2011 (WA). ,2. Mr Cramphorn is fined $20,000.,3. Mr Cramphorn is to pay the Building Services Board's costs of $3,200.
Summary	The Building Services Board filed an application on 8 February 2016 under s 56(2)(a) of the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 (WA) seeking disciplinary orders against Mr Gary Alan…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read BUILDING SERVICES BOARD and CRAMPHORN and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2016] WASAT 57
Decision Date: 20 MAY 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Building Services Board brought proceedings against Cramphorn, seeking disciplinary orders for breaches of the Building Services (Complaints Resolution and Administration) Act 2011, the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011, and the Home Building Contracts Act 1991. The Board alleged that Cramphorn had engaged in misconduct that warranted disciplinary action under the relevant Acts. The case was heard in a court with jurisdiction over matters related to building services and complaints resolution.

The primary legal issues before the court involved determining whether Cramphorn's conduct constituted disciplinary matters under the specified Acts and, if so, what appropriate sanctions should be imposed. The court had to evaluate the evidence and arguments presented by both parties to decide on the existence of any disciplinary matters and the appropriate penalties. This required an analysis of the statutory provisions and the relevant case law to ensure that the Board's authority was exercised fairly and within the bounds of the law.

The court found that Cramphorn's actions did indeed constitute disciplinary matters under the Building Services (Complaints Resolution and Administration) Act 2011 and the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011. The court considered the severity and frequency of the breaches, as well as the impact on the public and the reputation of the building services industry. Consequently, the court imposed a global fine of $20,000 on Cramphorn and ordered that he pay the Building Services Board's costs. This decision was aimed at deterring future misconduct and ensuring compliance with the regulatory framework governing building services in Western Australia.

Orders

Orders of the court

Disciplinary matters found to exist in conduct of practitioner under the Building Services (Complaints Resolution and Administration) Act 2011 (WA) and the Building Services (Registration) Act 2011 (WA)

Global fine of $20,000 imposed

Practitioner to pay Building Services Board's costs

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.